| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/17/2005 02:12:11 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by laurielblack:
I am trying to keep in mind that these are what the photographer really considered to be his/her best shot, and whatever processing he/she did to achieve their end result was because that is exactly how they wanted it to be. Just because I may not like it doesn't mean the processing was "carried away" or the photog didn't know when to quit. This challenge is a chance to show some different processing techniques that might not have worked for other challenges. I'm enjoying seeing the different genres and processing used. Agreed, some shots are what might be considered to be subpar, but overall, there are some engaging images posted. I had 40 shots above 6, and the rest were 4-5-6. Nothing below that. Just because I'm not emotionally attached to someone's kid doesn't mean that it's not a good photo. I might not hang it on my wall, but it can still be a fine photo anyway. I am starting to believe that I am the only one on DPC who looks at the images with an open mind anymore. I understand this is a competition, which makes for great fun and an extremely educational experience. It's what drew me to the site to begin with. I love that aspect. But I also think sometimes it's gotten out of hand in the sense that some might be losing sight of why we participate at all. This is fun, this is learning, this is a way to share your talent, heart, and soul with others. I try to keep that in mind when I vote and when I comment. A virtual ribbon isn't worth the negativity that gets displayed at times in the forums (not necessarily this thread, but you guys know what I mean). I guess I'm naive and silly for thinking like this, but then again, I'm a very upbeat, optimistic, and generally happy person. I see the images as "half full" automatically. Am I all alone in this boat? :o) |
Laurie, I wasn't saying that all processed shots or shots of kids were bad. I'm interested in seeing different processing. Some of the images were way overprocessed, though, and didn't look remotely good. If it doesn't look good, it doesn't look good. Why should I vote them a 7 (or whatever) just because, well, I may not like it but they do and think their work is good so I should give them the benefit of the doubt. I do keep an open mind when voting. I've voted things high when I didn't necessarily like the subject matter. If it's well executed they deserve a good score. I hate snakes but I won't automatically give a snake pic a 1. I love water and sunset shots but I won't just give them a 10, either. The photographer needs to earn the score.
Originally posted by laurielblack:
Just because I'm not emotionally attached to someone's kid doesn't mean that it's not a good photo. |
I agree. There are some terrific kid shots. I love your shots of the boys and the watermelon. I was meaning that sometimes people post kid shots that they think are wonderful because they are personally attached and don't look beyond that. They have to be presented in a way that others will find them interesting, artistic, telling a story, or whatever. If it doesn't affect the viewer in any way then the image won't do well.
As far as not voting below 4, my personal opinion is that that 1-3 are there for a reason. I don't use them much but do when I feel it's justified.
|
|
|
|
01/17/2005 02:19:19 PM · #27 |
I hope y'all didn't think I was picking on you guys persay... I'm just in one of those moods... LOL ;o) :hug
|
|
|
|
01/17/2005 02:20:02 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by jimmythefish:
Best is not elusive ON THIS SITE. It's very simple...best is something that will score well here, no? If you're entering a judged competition with hundreds of people voting, mass appeal MUST be considered above all. Sure, you can interpret it other ways I suppose, but then why enter a competition?
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
In one sentence, you say that 'best' is not elusive, then proceed to tell how you interpret 'best' as if your own interpretation is the only one. Others may not share your taste or your interpretation of what 'best' means. |
|
The 'best' is always subject to interpretation, that's why even the highest scoring shots get ones and the lowest get some tens. If it wasn't, then why have the contest at all? Wouldn't the person who had the best shot just know it's the best and the rest of us would know that ours isn't, so why bother?
The motivations for entering into any kind competition are many. I suppose that some do it strictly going for the top score, others may be motivated by a variety of factors, like strictly wanting to participate, to see how they stack up with the rest, see if they can score higher than they did last time, etc. If it's just about winning, why do so many people enter marathons who have to know there is no way they can win?
|
|
|
|
01/17/2005 02:21:47 PM · #29 |
I just chose one that I wanted comments on. Some of my best appeared on dpc, deviantart, etc so I didn't want to put them up again.
Message edited by author 2005-01-17 14:23:28.
|
|
|
|
01/17/2005 02:23:06 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by riotspyne:
Im not saying that you necessarily do that (vote down on children) but there are people who definitely do. |
This is the kindof thing that really bothers me. It doesn't seem right to lump the interesting photos/good portraits of cute kids with the boring/bad photos of cute kids, just because they're of cute kids. Why can't children be a subject. Just because a human is young doesn't make them lest interesting than an adult. I spent this past summer working with children and, as in everything I do, took a lot of pictures. I got some dull photos that don't really have much merit (though the kids are still cute) and I got some really beautiful ones. Kids have an amazing range of expression and make awesome candid subjects. If I submit an image of a child here, it's not going to be because the kid is cute, but because of the feeling of the photo. |
|
|
|
01/17/2005 02:23:54 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by laurielblack:
I hope y'all didn't think I was picking on you guys persay... I'm just in one of those moods... LOL ;o) :hug |
Don't worry. I don't take it personally. I was just clarifying. It's good to discuss things openly. :-)
|
|
|
|
01/17/2005 02:26:30 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by jimmythefish:
Best is not elusive ON THIS SITE. It's very simple...best is something that will score well here, no? If you're entering a judged competition with hundreds of people voting, mass appeal MUST be considered above all. Sure, you can interpret it other ways I suppose, but then why enter a competition?
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
In one sentence, you say that 'best' is not elusive, then proceed to tell how you interpret 'best' as if your own interpretation is the only one. Others may not share your taste or your interpretation of what 'best' means. |
|
This challenge was to submit what you considered to be your best photo, not the photo you predict will garner the highest score at DPC. For many/most folks here those would be the same shot, but not for everyone. Winning a ribbon is not the only reason to submit to a challenge -- if it were, these forums would be filled with the obituaries of frustrated phographers ... |
|
|
|
01/17/2005 02:26:31 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by laurielblack:
I'm a very upbeat, optimistic, and generally happy person. I see the images as "half full" automatically. Am I all alone in this boat? :o) |
I would describe myself very similarly indeed.
But there are some images which I personally just can't imagine hold interest for anyone but the photographer or perhaps a few members of their family and my positive nature doesn't make me blind to this (not that I'm suggesting yours does;).
And please note that I'm certainly not saying all images of peoples' kids fit into this category - there have been many images of peoples' kids that I have scored highly and that includes some in this challenge. But it all depends on whether the image is presented in such a way that it's universal or too narrowly personal in appeal.
I don't think it's doing anyone any favours to be charitable with voting just in order to avoid hurt feelings as I think most people who participate here really do want to improve.
I don't think voting is about trying to see the image just as the photographer saw it and vote accordingly but about giving honest feedback about how each voter sees the image objectively. I'm not saying it's not worthwhile trying to work out what the photographer was envisioning when they took/ entered the image - infact that's something I really like to do. But, at the end of the day, the image (including it's content) has to appeal to me.
Incidentally, my personal definition of a snapshot doesn't relate to how much planning or setup goes into it but to it's appeal. For me a snapshot is an image that holds personal appeal to those who have a personal connection to the content but holds little appeal to most viewers who do not. That's how I define it, anyway.
|
|
|
|
01/17/2005 02:34:10 PM · #34 |
Personally, I submitted *MY* best shot of 2004.. not one I thought would be scored the best.
The day that the competition here becomes more important than submitting what I like, is the day that it's time to leave.
I admit that I already came close to that, and took some time off. Now I'm back, and I've been submitting stuff that I like that has nothing to do with it being the best I could possibly to do garner votes.
I feel better for it too.. as much as I like to bitch. lol.
My shot in Best of 2004 is a very recogizably *me* shot.. (maybe not for everyone, but definitely for everyone that knows anything about me), and it's my best shot.. not just for 2004.. but *ever*.
It also happens to be of a child.. and I think that's hurt it.
You know what though? So what? When all is said and done.. *I* still have a gorgeous photograph that *is* hanging on my wall, and I've put it out there for people to see.. love or hate.
and that little virtual gif of a ribbon? (or jpg, whatever), well, they come and go. In 10 years, who'll really care? |
|
|
|
01/17/2005 02:35:07 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by kearock:
Originally posted by riotspyne:
Im not saying that you necessarily do that (vote down on children) but there are people who definitely do. |
This is the kindof thing that really bothers me. It doesn't seem right to lump the interesting photos/good portraits of cute kids with the boring/bad photos of cute kids, just because they're of cute kids. Why can't children be a subject. Just because a human is young doesn't make them lest interesting than an adult. I spent this past summer working with children and, as in everything I do, took a lot of pictures. I got some dull photos that don't really have much merit (though the kids are still cute) and I got some really beautiful ones. Kids have an amazing range of expression and make awesome candid subjects. If I submit an image of a child here, it's not going to be because the kid is cute, but because of the feeling of the photo. |
I vote down pictures of chidren if they are there just as an appeal to the cute factor, just as I would vote down a picture of the American flag if I felt it was merely appealing to some sense of patriotism. Same for cats, dogs, squirrels, neked women or anything else. It has to have more to stand on then "this is a cute kid" There are millions of cute kids out there, so if the photo has no redeeming artistic qualities other then the cute kid it is getting voted down.
A really good artist has no need of the cute (but may indeed employ them in his or her work) could take a picture of a horse's ass and make it look appealing.
Message edited by author 2005-01-17 14:38:14.
|
|
|
|
01/17/2005 02:47:54 PM · #36 |
These are definatly not snapshot pics.
This,
and this,
I would have scored very high, as well lit, composed and thought out portraits. There is a difference.
Message edited by author 2005-01-17 14:49:08.
|
|
|
|
01/17/2005 03:00:20 PM · #37 |
Overall I felt the quality of submissions were generally lower than I had expected. This could be in part because the Masters'.... erm invitional challenge was so good. It could also be because with 531 submissions the number of good entries are still outnumbered by the less than good entries and thus leaving a general feeling of a lack of overal quality. There is also the expectation that with a year's worth of images to go through you'd expect images that are far better than a normal challenge. Some images do look like they were snapped within the submission dates and others invoke a wonder of how something could truly be considered someone's best work of an entire year.
|
|
|
|
01/17/2005 03:00:31 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
"Best" is an elusive term, with different meaning to different people. For some it will be perfect composition. lighting, and focus on a still-life. For others, it will be capturing a poignant candid on the street -- the emotional engagement over-riding any technical deficiencies.
|
Indeed.
I enjoyed voting on this challenge. I love a free study, and when it covers the 'best' from a year long period, its hard to go wrong. I gave a record number of tens in this challenge... 52 of them to be exact.
Challenges like this one give me a chance to really see what a photogrpaher likes. Tossing out the restraints of a challenge topic is such a great experience. I love seeing what the photographer loves much more than what they have done to try to make an image fit a mold in a short timeframe.
Kudos to everone who entered...
|
|
|
|
01/17/2005 03:05:48 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by Kavey:
"Why would you enter this into a competition of the best of an entire year?".
I know that sounds harsh but I am surprised that some of the entries were entered at all...
That said there are some images I am really enjoying. |
Because they thought it was the best. I submited mine knowing full well it would score low. But it was the photo I liked best for the year. I even wrote that in my comments for after the challenge. Sorry its not all the great sunset/water/processed photos that everyone else likes. I like it and I take shots for me.
|
|
|
|
01/17/2005 03:07:43 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Indeed.
I enjoyed voting on this challenge. I love a free study, and when it covers the 'best' from a year long period, its hard to go wrong. I gave a record number of tens in this challenge... 52 of them to be exact.
Kudos to everone who entered... |
You can always tell who the good photographers are... they are never afraid to give high scores. :)
|
|
|
|
01/17/2005 03:08:56 PM · #41 |
I'm not finished voting yet, but I do get the feeling that the entries are generally good. I am excited that there are so many types of images in this challenge. From landscapes to macros to portraits to candids. If they are true to themselves and communicate effectively, I've given any type a high score. I agree with Setz, kudos to all for a great year of photography!
|
|
|
|
01/17/2005 03:11:12 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Indeed.
I enjoyed voting on this challenge. I love a free study, and when it covers the 'best' from a year long period, its hard to go wrong. I gave a record number of tens in this challenge... 52 of them to be exact.
Kudos to everone who entered... |
You can always tell who the good photographers are... they are never afraid to give high scores. :) |
I thought they took good photos...
|
|
|
|
01/17/2005 03:19:09 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Originally posted by stdavidson:
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Indeed.
I enjoyed voting on this challenge. I love a free study, and when it covers the 'best' from a year long period, its hard to go wrong. I gave a record number of tens in this challenge... 52 of them to be exact.
Kudos to everone who entered... |
You can always tell who the good photographers are... they are never afraid to give high scores. :) |
I thought they took good photos... |
That too... and as such are not intimidated. :)
|
|
|
|
01/17/2005 03:26:10 PM · #44 |
We should all keep in mind that this site displays work from people with a wide range of photographic knowledge and talent. From highly experienced professional photographers, to total beginners who may have never taken a photo before, and everything in between. With such a diverse group of people I would be very surprised to see anything other than a wide range of results. Personally, I expected to see everything, from truly excellent photos, to very amateurish photos, and everything in between. I havenât been surprised.
|
|
|
|
01/17/2005 03:47:49 PM · #45 |
There are definitely some blow-your-mind shots in this challenge. I mean, hair-raising good shots. I'd even say 70-80 per cent of these shots could have won a weekly challenge at some point. However, as for the bottom 5 per cent, I was totally shocked some people submitted certain photos. First, they won't get feedback since there are so many challenge photos and second. Second, just unbelievable what some people consider good enough shots for a year's best.
That said, I'm so curious to see the winners. I hope everyone gets scores worthy of the shots they took -- b/c even those rated at 400th place will probably be worth at least 6.6's. |
|
|
|
01/17/2005 03:50:05 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by ccraft:
I hope everyone gets scores worthy of the shots they took -- b/c even those rated at 400th place will probably be worth at least 6.6's. |
...there went my good feelings about my 6.39. 
|
|
|
|
01/17/2005 04:50:50 PM · #47 |
nsbca7
All the images of children you have posted are absolutely ones that I think DO have universal appeal without personal connection to the kids that feature in them. Each one conveys something universal to me about emotion, life, experience, memories etc.
The ones I'm referring to are ones which don't strike me in that way. Unfortunately I can't really show you what I mean as it would be the height of meaness to link images here as examples.
|
|
|
|
01/17/2005 04:58:45 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by Artyste:
Personally, I submitted *MY* best shot of 2004.. not one I thought would be scored the best.
... |
I did the opposite and am regretting it BIG TIME. This is the last time I'll prostitute myself for a few measly tenths of a point!!
;-) |
|
|
|
01/17/2005 05:11:58 PM · #49 |
I had a blast voting on the challenge, I score 61 of the entrees either 9 or 10 and will be going over them with more care and likely bumping up a fair number. There were no photos that, in my opinion, ranked below a 3 and I only gave out two 3s. There were only 16 that I gave 4s. Over all I thought the photos were great. I think some people might have been voting on the submissions thinking to themselves, âIs this the best you have for the year?â rather then voting on the photo for its own merit. A few of the photos seemed to be the kind that held a lot of meaning to the photographer that did not translate well to others, but I did not feel there were many of these at all.
I was delighted at how few studio shots there were compared to photos of the world we live in. I think there is a real lessen in looking at these photos that the really great photo wait for us outside in the world and not in something that we create in the studio. After looking at these photo I am going to work hard not to shoot any more studio shoots for challenges but rather go out and try to capture part of the real world, this is why I got into photography in the first place.
|
|
|
|
01/17/2005 05:23:33 PM · #50 |
In choosing my photo, part of the appeal of the one I chose was the fact that it took almost no post-processing. It's one I kept coming back to and thinking, "Hey, I took that shot. I'm pretty good!" (Now don't tell me you've never had that reaction to one of your own shots!) The specifics of the subject may be lost on some viewers, but the general type of shot I think still has an interest factor.
I'm not sure what to think of the scoring. I am very disappointed in my own score (4.xxx), and have no idea why it's that low. It's such a broad challenge that it's really hard to vote, but I am scoring each one on it's own merits. If I end up with 20 10's then so be it.
Overall, the entries were less exciting than I had anticipated, but there are some great ones as always. Do it again next year? I'm not sure. It's almost TOO broad I think for this size of a site. I think somehow making it a bit more manageable might be a good idea - dividing into categories or skill levels, camera types....something like that.
Just my thoughts, since you asked. :) |
|
